Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.95s
City of Prosser v. Teamsters Union Local 839
Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 19, 2022
Martin, 195 F.3d 1208, 1218 (10th Cir. 1999) (holding that the relevant law was “clearly established” in the post-October 1994 time frame for purposes of defendant’s claim of qualified immunity); cf. Sampson v. … and by officials acting under color of state law. 7 Article I, section 12 states: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Jan 29, 2026
JOHNSON 3 meaningful opportunities for recreation was clearly established. … Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages” when “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a
Cited 0 timesPublished866 F. Supp. 336 · District Court, W.D. Kentucky · Oct 28, 1994
legal rules that were “clearly established” at the time the actions were taken. … Thus, Officer Ward did not violate Dean’s clearly established constitutional rights and is immune from monetary liability under § 1983.
Cited 7 timesPublished106 F.3d 582 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Feb 6, 1997
51 We hold, therefore, that an official who performs an act clearly established to be beyond the scope of his discretionary authority is not entitled to claim qualified immunity under § 1983. … established for qualified immunity purposes."
Cited 205 timesPublishedJarvis v. WEST VIRGINIA STATE POLICE
227 W. Va. 472 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 18, 2010
Postponing review of a ruling denying immunity to the post-trial stage is fruitless ... because the underlying objective in any immunity determination (absolute or qualified) is immunity from suit. … How could any court ever conclude that the general concepts of negligence do not constitute clearly established law?
Cited 29 timesPublished3502 Partners LLC v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth.
2026 NY Slip Op 01118 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 26, 2026
Plaintiff sufficiently demonstrated that the proposed amendment was not palpably insufficient or clearly devoid of merit ( see MBIA Ins. Corp. v Greystone & Co., Inc. , 74 AD3d 499, 499-500 [1st Dept 2010]). … In any event, defendants have failed to make a sufficient showing that all of them would be immune from punitive damages, and there is no dispute that one of them — Tutor Perini Corporation — does not qualify as a public
Cited 0 timesPublished878 F.2d 1043 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · May 22, 1989
of clearly established law. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635, 640 , 107 S.Ct. 3034, 3039 (1987) (to overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must allege that the official violated a clearly established right, the contours of which are sufficiently clear that
Cited 102 timesPublished689 F. Supp. 874 · District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Jul 27, 1988
The Court has carved out a qualified immunity for government officials whose “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Therefore, the defense of qualified immunity is not available to defendants. See Forrester v.
Cited 49 timesPublished333 F. Supp. 3d 817 · District Court, N.D. Iowa · Sep 14, 2018
In those jurisdictions, there cannot be liability unless the defendant violated "clearly established ... constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." … In my prior ruling, as to qualified immunity to the federal constitutional clam, I concluded that it was not clearly established that Baldwin's conduct-operating his ATV in a ditch that was publicly-owned property-did not
Cited 6 timesPublished857 F.2d 1214 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Dec 13, 1988
If such a violation would not have been apparent in light of available remedies, Birkenholz’ due process right is not “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes. … Because any violation could not have been apparent, Birkenholz’ due process right was not “clearly established” for qualified immunity purposes.
Cited 20 timesPublished183 Ariz. 1 · Court of Appeals of Arizona · Jul 13, 1995
that they were entitled as a matter of law to qualified immunity. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.
Vacated on other grounds by Kerr v. Waddell, 185 Ariz. 457 (1996)Cited 4 timesPublished381 F. Supp. 3d 521 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 17, 2019
The second prong of the qualified immunity analysis examines whether a police officer's conduct violated a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time that the conduct occurred. … In consequence, the Fourth Circuit held that the officer was not entitled to qualified immunity for seven of the Taser shocks because he had violated the clearly established constitutional right of an arrestee to be free
Cited 8 timesPublishedJacob Todd, etc. v. John R. Smith
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jan 10, 1997
At this early stage, qualified immunity would be granted only if immunity is established on the face of the complaint. Id. … Gilley, 500 U.S. 226, 232 (1991) (whether federal right has been violated is "necessary concomitant" of whether right was clearly established and objectively discernible).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedAspen Exploration Corp. v. Sheffield
739 P.2d 150 · Alaska Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1987
Second, Aspen asserts that our prior deci *153 sions establish a rule of qualified, rather than absolute, immunity. … See generally Comment, Immunity: Eliminating the Subjective Element from the Qualified Immunity Standard in Actions Brought Against Government Officials, 22 Washburn L.Rev. 577 (1983). *158 The one exception established to
Cited 48 timesPublishedWest Virginia Lottery v. A-1 Amusement, Inc.
807 S.E.2d 760 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 13, 2017
Therefore, even if the State purchases a policy of insurance, a state agency and its official may claim immunities under the common law, such as qualified immunity. 70 Pursuant to this analysis, qualified immunity is available … qualified immunity in this context.
Cited 11 timesPublished825 So. 2d 409 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Aug 21, 2002
Section 216(b), in turn, clearly provides for suits by individuals against States. … Accordingly, the reasoning that underlies the immediate appealability of an order denying ... qualified immunity should be...
Cited 17 timesPublishedEast Coast Novelty Co., Inc. v. City of New York
809 F. Supp. 285 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 17, 1992
clearly established’ at the time it was taken.” … But, [e]ven where the law is “clearly established” and the scope of an official’s permissible conduct is “clearly defined,” the qualified immunity defense also protects an official if it was “objectively reasonable” for him
Cited 8 timesPublished234 F. Supp. 2d 352 · District Court, S.D. New York · Dec 6, 2002
Violation of Clearly Established Law The Supreme Court recently addressed the issue of what constitutes “clearly established law” for purposes of the qualified immunity defense. See Hope v. … Objective Reasonableness of Officers’ Actions It is not sufficient for the qualified immunity analysis to determine that the right violated was clearly established at the time of its violation.
Cited 61 timesPublished574 F.3d 361 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Jul 21, 2009
Qualified immunity protects public officials from liability for damages if their actions did not violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known. Harlow v. … To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show that (1) the facts make out a violation of the plaintiffs federal rights, and (2) the right at issue was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct
Cited 75 timesPublishedDemster v. City of Lenexa, Kan.
359 F. Supp. 2d 1182 · District Court, D. Kansas · Mar 16, 2005
The court dismissed this claim after finding that defendants were shielded by qualified immunity. … Once a defendant asserts a qualified immunity defense, the court employs a two-part test.
Cited 5 timesPublished
Ask Donna